













V ^ V 

/ .^0 ** 

•I » 'Crv o 



^ 0^ 

■o.^^ o ^0 

*'■’* 

«• jA A «' c^ * 


-% WW^' / \ 

’•'O <» A ^ *0 > 


« V^^v- * < 0 ^ ^ O^ 

> -«..• . 0 ^ A <* 

(-Cr o°^‘’i "%> ^ ,<■'•» <K 

^'%L. 

* Wt- <^^ *W.,» 0 


<•9 -• ^^iiiiiiii^^^ o 

<■? • ©Hi® ♦ 

‘ ^ '^'T.s^ A 

. o « o . 




^ a « o ^ ^ e « 0 ® 

^ \r p'' • °^ <0^ s« • •'* v^ t» ^ • 

'^^il-' » >e::^aiIlllllJII^^ f- 


"I ^ 

• xO 






iV' *• 

r ♦ -rt 

* 


t-' r 


U» 


^ ^%v 1 \\sn:^ ^ bJ^ * ^ 

"..o’ O . 




tf '^m° '\i .°^^- '^'^' 

,'»..• . 0 ^ A <**'?•»•* jO*" t: 

%. .> -,'i* .♦V^’. tv 

i -« ^ 0 ^ ® 


" O ■ 


O- '^•’%o ‘5 \''*.T^’-.-»'«■■ ^b. '- 

. 0 ^ V V ii»*o^ ^ 

•* •®*^ - ;-^&-; %f 


\. 



















1 o ^0 


i • o 



^ ‘■..o’ O ♦.,,*’ ^0-' "V ♦..o''* . 

•i-' ♦- ^ ’■1,'i' -k? > V 


..*' v> <^ ,6^ ^ 

<<i> . w I • ^ rv"^ 0« O 

bv^ f 

V K ^ 

' -O^y ^ rKV «» A, '^rk cHy * 






* “V • 

C°^ .'^l' °o 

>-d« : 




o 



w ^>*■ 4 *^ 


\r '^o • K ^ -0 C> ^ >1-J 

<‘Jy ^ t # fl Q^ c ® ^ ^ -1.^ <1 ® -p 


oV 


* aP '7"> 

♦ r\ 4^. 

'«/%.«/ *i» 





C » 

. 0^ f 

O ^ \ 

o N O ^ *' 9 ,^* aO 

V^ ‘‘I,*"- <^ A? 


" o n 0 


: : 

♦ < 6 ? '“ 0 ^ * 

■* ^ V. - 



ft! ^ c^ . 0^ <► .o ,1-^ i 



V 


^ V 


lO 

«r 





Cp '^fv 

* <p ^ 
- * >'^ 

<0 ^. rP , 0 N c ^ 


o -CL^ ^ 


:^o* 



O f * 


- 


^ 0 ^ 




v^ . 

,* •• 

<» ,0' "o A <A ^o'**'*’* aO 

O V ft w o L / « r\ > o M o " ^ 

I o ^ 4b. *• ^ c ^ 0 . O 

• ^ o J ^ ^ C«p 


»• o^ ^ \0* 4 ®!oL'4. 

CV> ♦ 

..a’ A <*^ ' . * 

^ .*0 c 



■» ’.y c 

< ^ 0^ 


-iS ♦ 

C4 > • 

' <y ^ 

V. *»««> 


A o 


o 

o VV *' 0 , ,0^ 

0 " O - .‘d’'’ «<■'«♦ Or r ° ® ■» 

• o. > 





^\P^ ^ o A^'^ C^^fs ^ 



•* <L^ V^ •* 

^ ‘V ^ 




.... .o- "o, ♦o-r.T. A '...* .0^ ♦oT;.. A 

Q^ 0 ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ® 4 0^ 0 ^ ^ ^ ^ 

»«o, ^ ^ v^ t*:,*®- ^ aO V 


^,0 

H*q 


v^ 









/• -K 



\. >. 



























r 



t 


if: 


\ 




\ 


1 . 

:-4i '■*•? 


1 


i i 



«r I 



I 


« • 


« 


I 


I > 


V 




I « 


r>ifc' ; 


I 


t 


I A 


t • 


f- 


i: ‘ 


I 












f V <V 







I 



[>• 


:• i. 



I' 



I 


I 







I 





( 




, t 

i i, 




c 


GEORGIA, 


ON THE 


PilKSlDKNTIAL ISSUES. 


DELIVERED IN TH® 



”5 


' ; nOl'SE OF REPRESENTATIVES OP THE UNITED STATES 

i 

'•v 

I V- 

i V ON THE 9TH OF AUGUST, 185G. 

,A 

V 

!i (. 




f V ,■ . 

i WASHINGTON; 

AMERICAN ORGAN, PRINT., 

,, AFGFST, 1856. 

r’ i. . ' 

• I 


.•ii 







k 


>, 


I 


• I 





• 1 








k • ■«■ - 











• I 






ttA/ jsy-v 


f, . •('a : f ■ ■ . 


N A TI O N A1. ¥ 01.1 T I (3 S 


The House, being in Committee of the Whole ' 
on the state of the Ciuon, having under coasider- 
I ation the President’s Annual Message, Saturday, 
9th August, 1856— 

I Mr. POSTER, of Georgia, said: 

Mr. Chairman, that we are in the midst of per- 
ilous times, no one who opens his eyes to things 
c around him will deny. Civil war in one of onr 
Territofies—strong feelings of hostility between 
sections of the Union—a great party marshalled 
undera sectional banner, claiming the w'hole North, 
and pressing the truth of that claim by every dem¬ 
onstration which comes to us from that quarter— 
a deep and settled purpose In the South never to 
submit to sectional rule, not evidenced by the rant 
of extreme men of that section, but made signifi¬ 
cant by the demonstrations of men who have al¬ 
ways stood by the Union. This is an epitome of 
the state of things. Would I could give a more 
cheering picture. But truth requires me to 
sketch the likeness as the lines of light and shade 
fall upon the original, from the point at which I 
stand. 

How shall these things be remedied ? The skil¬ 
ful physician will always seek through all the symp¬ 
toms of his patient for the cause of disease, before 
he risks a prescripiion; especially if he has a pro¬ 
per regard for the life of the subject. If we feel 
the same solicitude for the body politic, we, too, 
will look well to the cause of all our present ills, ; 
before we liurry to a remedy. 

Did the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska act pro¬ 
duce these troubles? It is alleged that this act, 
containing, as it did, a clause for the repeal of the 
law of Congress known familiarly as the Missouii 
Compromise, did brhig upon us the present un¬ 
happy state of tilings. It is my purpose on this 
occasion to examine the history of that act, and 
show that not the repeal of the Missouri line, but 
the rr>ode and manner of that repeal, has done the 
mischief. Why should the simple repeal of that 
line excite the North to resistance, when it is well 
known that a large poi-tion of those now arrayed 
against the South were always opposed to it as a 
compromise? It serves a very good pretext for 
agitation, but it is nothieg but a ptetext. V/e 
frequently hear the South appealed to, to resist 
every efibrt to restore that line, and the attempt is 
])eing made to induce the belief that such an effort 
will be made. Now, sir, I have no apprehen-ion 
on that point. If there were no more serious 
difliculties before ua than an effort to restore that 
line, 1 should have no fnirs for the safety of the 
Comnaonwealch. I speak what I conscientiously 
believe, when I now assert that, if the question of 
restoration were put to thi.s House, under ch eutn- 
stances fivoring its consummation beyond these 
walls, that not twenty-five votes could be record¬ 
ed for its passage. 


I know that upon an amendment offered to one 
of the bills before the Hr.use by tlio gentleman 
from Indiana, [Mr. Dunn,] proposing, among other 
things to restore that line, that a mujority voted 
for it. i understiind that game. It was very safe 
to make a point for home consumption, when thcro 
was no chance for the ultimate success of the mea¬ 
sure. We are not to make up our con elusions 
from a single act, but from the line of action pro¬ 
jected by a pai'ty. Do the Republicans propose 
to restore that line ? Look to their platform, and 
you will find not even an intimation to that effect. 
No, sir, their game is not to repeal the Kansas- 
Nebraska act, but under the excitement incident; 
upon that action of Congress, they intend to drive 
another great party of the country to the adoption! 
of principles, as deductions from that legislation, 
which will give them more than a restoration rkjq 
promise. They seek for wider scope for agitation, 
and new avenues through which to mate their 
assaults moro deadly upon the institutions of the 
South. How far they have succeeded, and Jire 
likely to succeed, will appear by looking to the ac¬ 
tion of the country for the past few years, I uii 
going to speak freely of the Kansas-Nebr-Jska le¬ 
gislation in the presence of my Democratic fiucnda 
from the South. That it was denied all over Ihe 
South that that bill contained anything akin to 
“squatter sovereignty,” all must admit. If any 
man who advocated the Democratic side of the 
questiou had made the admission one year ago, in 
the South, that tlie Kansas bill rccogniH.;d the 
power of Con^rcsi to legislate on the snbjoct; oil 
slavery in the Territories, he could not have gath¬ 
ered a corporal’s guard to muster under his ban* 
ner. There iia? been great anxiety to ascertain 
wliat tliat bill did contain. It has been alleged all 
the while, that it was remi one way at ibo South 
and another way at the North. I know that i« 
was helieeed one way at the South, and talked 
another way at the North. This, so long as it re- . 
mained a simple question of theory, gave fitU® 
cause of concern. But, when a ‘great party in 
this country, now in power in two of the co-ordi-. 
nate depaitmouts of the government, and asking 
of the peojile an extcnsioa of their lease, saw 
proper, at the commeucement of the present ses¬ 
sion of Ooiigrcss, to adopt the Kansas bill, in tenns, 
as the only rule of their faith and practice, it did 
behoove every voter, who intended to give his suf¬ 
frage uiulerstauihngly, to look.well into the prin¬ 
ciples of that bill I ha'vo, on a former occasion, 
alluded to this thing, and I then asked of my 
Democratic friends, that they would lay down »sa 
rule of action, not the Kansas biil, but the 'prln^ 
ctplvs cootaiued in tb it biil, atj they nadeistood 
them, A. d I hoped tlut, when they assembled 
in national conv- ntion, knowing as they did the 
charges that had been made agalusi them of an 


% 






4 




efl'ori to uilsluad, they would have done themselvei? 
and the country justice in this matter. In this 
hepe 1 have been disappointed. That convention 
met and adjourned, and when its proceedings came 
to the country, the oracle was as Delphic as be¬ 
fore they met. I have sought through every chan¬ 
nel that was open to me to solve the mystery, and 
will ahvy proceed to give to the Committee and to 
the country tlie result of my labors. It appears 
from the declarations of some of the Southern 
supporters of tire Democratic nominee, that there 
was a eorapromise made between the Kansas-Ne- 
braska men North nrui South when that measure 
was to be adopted. What was that compromise'? 
The men of the South denied that Congress had 
any power to legislate upon the subject of slavery 
in thy Terri tories. The men of the North claimed 
that Congress did possess that power. Here was a 
difficulty that must bo met. Shall the North or 
the .South yield? Both sections claimed that they 
yielded no principle in this adjustment. Let us 
see. When the Kan.sas bill proposed to leave to 
the people of the Tej'ritories the right to form 
their cwi domestic institutions in their own w.?.r, 
sufject to the Con.'.'dtutioii of the United States, 
did it intend to express the idea that Congress 
had power to legislate upon the subject of slavery 
in the Territories? We at the South say it did 
not. How do the raeu at the North regard it ? 
Of course, if they yielded do principle iji the .ar- 
rangemenr, they muat hold that the bill not only 
does contain the admission of that power, but was 
iuteuded to contain tluit admission. 

The bill in terms proposes lo clothe tlm people 
'of the Territories with the power—it assumes, it 
subject only to ike Coirsiitxdion of the United 
iitates; and all, therefore, who hold that the power 
exist.s in Congress under the Constitution, must of 
necessity hold that the power was recognised in 
the bill Did the men of the South who were par¬ 
ties to tb.at arrangement of compromise know that 
the men of the North so understood it? K‘A a 
matter of course they must have known it, for that 
formed tVte very gist of the compromise. A sim¬ 
ple repet.l of tlte Mi.ssouri restriction w’ould have 
left both sections free to seek tlieir rights under 
the ConsLiiUtion; but this did not satisfy the North. 
If they agreed to the repeal on their side, the 
South must at least go tlirough the form oi re¬ 
cognising the power of Congress, and if they 
feared the thing would be too palpable, might 
throw in the verbi.-ige “SUBJECT ONLY TO THE 
CONSTlTU-TiON 0? THE UNITED STATES.” 
That little addition could hurt nobody, especially 
those who claimed the power under the Constitu¬ 
tion. And just here u very grave question arises— 
If the men of the South who \rere parties to the 
understanding voted for the measure with a full 
knowledge that the party North understood the bill 
to contain the recognition of the power of Con¬ 
gress to legislate upon the subject of slavery in 
the Teiritorio?, are they, or are they not f'omid by 
that act? In law this would not admit of a ques¬ 
tion. How far good faith and good morals require a 
fulfilment of the expectations of the North on this 
subject, Heave every oue to determine for himself. 
But, if there had been any doubt upou the subject 
as to how the party at the North regarded this 
qaeetioc, that doubt has been dissipated by the 


developments of the last few months. I pass over 
the fact, that at Cincinnati the South was required, 
to give up her preference for the nominee for the 
Presidency. Nor will I stop to discuss the plat¬ 
form of that Convention. It is sufficient on that 
subject, that resolutions in relation to internal im¬ 
provement were passed, and violated before the 
I ink that wrote them got dry. That a kind^ of 
I busli-seine drag-net was hung on by w'ay of making 
I a clean sweep, tad-poles and all. But the only 
i’plank ill the platform which attracted attention, or 
j at least the one that was of absorbing interest—the 
! ground and pillar of its support, was the Kansas 
I Nebraska act. The principles of that bill, unde- 
j fined it is true to the uniniated, were still to be the 
I landmarks of the Democratic, or rather American 
Democratic party. 

How anxiously then did m'c loolc to the letter of 
acceptance of ithe nominee of that Conveution. 
Will he illumine the darkness that hangs around 
that much-talked of measure, was felt by all and 
expressed by many? Well, the letter came and 
the mystery was revealed. Hear him! 

“ This legislation is founiled, upon principles, na 
I ancient as free government itself, and in accordance 
j with them, has simply declared THAT THE PEO¬ 
PLE OF A TEURITORY, LfKE THOSE OF A 
I STATE, SHALL DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES, 
i WHETHER SLAVERY SHALL OR SHALL NOT 
1 EXIST WITHIN THEIR LIMITS.” 

j Is there any doubt notv as to M'hat the Kansas 
I bill meant? “The people of a Territory, like those 
j of a State, skall decide for themselves whether sla¬ 
very shall or shall not exist within their limits.” 
j Is this “ S(iuatter sovereignty?” No air; it is 
j much worse, as I .shall now propose to show. The 
1 practical effects are the same, but the principle 
' involved is vastly more dangerous to the South, 
i “ Squatter sovereignty,” as defined by those who 
j were at its baptism, is the right claimed by iutru- 
1 ders, or squattcr-s in a Territory of the United 
I States, to manage their own affairs, independent of 
i Congress altogether. Those who hold this doc- 
1 trine, are few in nimibor, so flu* as they have de- 
i veloped. The distingui.shed Senator from Michi- 
; gan, [Geneu-^l Cass] ranks as Godfather to the 
bantling, and I believe the gentleman from Ten¬ 
nessee, [Mr.. Jokes not now in his seat,] thinks 
him a promising youth. At lea.st he talked some¬ 
thing in the first part of the session, about the 
“inherent, rights” that went with the squatter into 
the Territory. Mr. Buchanan does not place the 
power of the people in a Territory like those in a 
Shite, upon auy “inherent right” in the squatter, 
but draws it from the “ legislation” of Congress. 
For the* want of a name we may designate his, 
CHARTER sovereignty. And to get the power 
into the people of a Territory you perceive he 
I must first recognise it in Congress, 
j If his letter of acceptance left any doubt ou tlie 
1 subject (which to a candid mind it cannot) that 
{ letter taken in connexion with his letter known 
j as the Sandford letter, puts the matter beyond all 
1 controversy. 

Mr. ARNER, (interrupting.) I understand my 
colleague to say that, as he interprets Mr. Buch¬ 
anan’s letter of acceptance, he holds that the peo¬ 
ple of the Territories in their legislative capacity 
have the right to exclude slavery therefrom. Now 


« 







I wish to call his attention to the fact, that Mr. 

^ ^ Buchanan says that the people of the Territory 
' have the right, in the same manner as a State, to 
determine the question for themselves— at what 
time ? Will my colleague say tliat that refers to 
the time while they are acting in a legislative capa¬ 
city, or to the time when they meet in convention 
to frame a State constitution} As I interpret it, 
it means that it is when they meet in convention 
«: for the purpose of framing a State constitution 
that they have the right, in the same manner as a 
V State ? ^ " 

Mr. HARRIS, of Alabama. My honorable friend 
,v will permit me to interrogate him one. moment. I 
presume he has before him the letter of Mr. 
Buchanan’s, called the Sandford letter, to which 
he has alluded. If so, I ask him to look at it and 
say if Mr. Buchanan does not there expressly lay 
k down the proposition that the people have the 
right to decide the qiiestion of slavery at the 
^ period of time when they come to fr.ame their 
constitution ? 

Mr. FOSTER. I will answer both the gentle- 
«■ men. My colleague over the way [Mr. Warner] 
a.sks at what time it is. I understood Mr. Buch- 
^ anan in his letter of acceptance to hold that the 
people of a Territory have the right to admit or 
^ exclude domestic 8la\’'»iry. I did not suppose, as I 
^ have already said, tliere could be any doubt left. 

Mr. Van Buren, his commentator, does not think it 
4 admits of doubt or cavil. He says: 

“From these terms it is too clear to admit of doubt 
J or cavil, that it was the intention of Congress to 
clothe the people of the ierritories with ample 
. power to exclude slavery from within their respect- 
>ve limits, as well while they continued Territories as 
in making provisions for its exclusion from the State 
4 wlien that transition shaU take place.” 

Has Mr. Buchanan or any of his friends ever re- 
pudiated that letter? On the contrary has it not 
been heralded forth, even from the Southern De¬ 
mocratic press as a patriotic letter?” My friend 
^ from Alabama, [Mr. Harris] says that in the 
Sandford letter it is at the time they come to form a 
State constitution that they may admit or exclude 
slavery. I said before that the two letters togeth¬ 
er made up the case beyond cavil. So far from 
•' denying I am attempting to establish, by incon¬ 
testable evidence, that Mr. Buchanan holds the 
doctrine that Congress^ and not the people of the 
’ Territory, have the power over the subject. While 
the power remains in Congress, of course it is not 
with the people, for it cannot be in both places at 
one and the same time. The g.'-eat question for 
the South in this matter is, has Congress the 

> power? This is the hinge on which turns the 
whole thing, and it is that I am now trying to im- 

> press upon my Southern friends. 

Mr. WRIGHT, of Tennessee. As the gentleman 
^ from Georgia is arguing the doctrine of squatter 
sovereignty, I should like to know what is Mr. Fill¬ 
more’s position upon that subject. 

Mr. FOSTER. I will come to that presently. 
Let us finish the job we are upon, before we enter 
upon another. 

Mr. WARNER. I do not desire to embarrass 
my colleague at ail. I have the kindest feelings 
for him, but I desire to ask him if he does not hold 
that the people of a Territory have the power, 


when they come to form a State constitution, to 
decide whether there shall or shall not be slavery 
•there ? 

Mr. FOSTER. Most assuredly I do. My col¬ 
league is too good a lawyer net to understand the 
position I am pressing. The Kansas-Nebraska bill 
proposes, by its terms, to transfer the power, by 
Congress, to the people of the Territories. My 
colleague [Mr. Steoiiens] not now' in Lis seat 
has been asked the question more than once du¬ 
ring the present session of Congress, whether the 
power to legislate upon domestic slavery had been 
transferred by Congress, in the Kansiia bill, to the 
people of that Territory ? His ansiver has been 
frank an*3 explicit. If Congress h.ad the power, 
the people of Kansas has got it—Congress could 
only grant what power it had. This is, in sub¬ 
stance, his answer; I have not his language before 
me. He stated, at the same time, that he, as an 
individual, did not believe that Congress had the 
power; but, if the people of the Territory exer¬ 
cised that power, he stood ready to acquiesce. 
Now, that Mr. Buchanan holds that Congress pos¬ 
sesses the power, under the Constitution, 1 repeat, 
is too manifest to be questioned by anybody. In 
his Sandford letter he says so, most emphatically. 

I do not wonder at all that my Southern Demo¬ 
cratic friends are a little restless upon this subject. 
They feel the force of the position I have taken— 
that Mr. Buchanan, with hi.s declared opinion as to 
the power of Congress, must hold that t^e people 
are to determine the question for themselves while 
in a Territorial state. And they can but feel the 
disagreeable position they are driven into by their 
support of Mr, Buchanan. If they take him at aJl, 
Ahey must take him cwm onere. They must admit, 
in the veiy act of thiTir support, that Congress has 
power to legislate on the subject of slavery in the 
Territories, uod, having that power, have already 
trnnsf rred it to the people of Kansas and Ne¬ 
braska. 

Mr. HOUSTON. Has the gentleman a copy of 
Mr. Buchanan’s letter? 

Mr. FOSTER. I have got it mixed with my 
papers, and cannot put my hand on it at this mo¬ 
ment ; but it shall be published correctly. 

Mr. HOUSTON. Will the gentleman state his 
language on the subject ? 

Mr. FOSTER. I will not undertake to state his 
precise words, but I can state near enough for our 
present purpose. He had been represented as 
holding to the doctrine of “ squatter sovereignty,” 
He repelled that idea, and, as a conclusive proof 
that he could not so hold with consisteno, said he 
held that Congress had a sovereign power on the 
subject, which, from its nature, must be exclusive. 

But, to save the gentleman from any apprehen¬ 
sion o' unfliirness on that subject, I again assure 
him that when I Iiave my speech printed the letter 
shall be instrted, and permitted to speak for itself: 

Washington, August 21, 1848, 

Dear Sir : I have just received yours of the 12th 
iihstant, in which you submit to me the following 
paragraph, and ask whether it contains an accurate 
version of the conversation between us, concerning 
my Berks county letter, on the occasion to which you 
refer: 

“ Happening to meet Mr. Buchanan at the Presi¬ 
dent’s levee, on Friday evening, I called his attention 
to this lettei’, and asked liim if he intended to be un- 









G 




tif, cl valuing (but (i.c population of a Ten i- 
torj in an uiiorga'-ized capacity had the right to con¬ 
trol the question of slavery in s.cch Territory, lie 
decbj*e(l that no such idea had ever been maintained 
hy hiin ; that tho construction put upon his language 
)by Jir. Yancey v^'as a porvorti'on of its plain ami ob¬ 
vious meaning; ibal, in his opinion, (ht; inhabitants 
of a Territory, as such, bad no political rights, [al¬ 
though they possessed all the private rigiitsof Amer¬ 
ican citizens;] that they had no power whatevei’over 
the fadjj ct of slavery; and they could neither inter¬ 
dict nor establish it, excepA when assembled in con¬ 
vention to form a State constitution, lie furiher au¬ 
thorized and requested me to make any public use of 
these declarations that T might think proper, to cor¬ 
rect Slav impression which Mr, Yauc-ey’a construction 
of 1ms language in the Berk.s letter- might have iiicwie.” 

With the addition which I have inserted bei ween 
brackets, this statement i.s substantially and almost 
literally correct, according to my i-ecollection. 

In my letter to Berks county of 25tb August, 1847, 
I had said, “under the Missouri Comjrromise slavery 
was forever prohibited north of the parallel of 36 de 
gi-ees 30 minutes, and south of this partillel the ques¬ 
tion was left to be decided by the people.” What 
peo|de? Undoubtedly the people of the Territory 
Hssembied in conventlen to form a State const^utioa 
and tsk admission into the Union; and not the first 
advent lirers or “ first comers ” who might happen to 
arrive in the Territory, assembled, in public meeting. 
If a doubt on this subject could possibly exist, it is 
removed by the next succeeding sentence of my let¬ 
ter. 5 proceeded to state: “Cougress. on theadmis- 
rsion of Texas, adopted the same rule,” etc. And 
what was this rule? “The Joint Resolution for an¬ 
nexing Texas to the United States,” approved March 
let, 1846, answers the question in the following 
woi-ds: “And such States as may bo formed out of 
that |>ortiou of said territory lying south of thirty-six 
degrees thirty minutes, north latitude, commonly 
known as the Missouri Compromise ]ine, shall be ad¬ 
mitted into the Union, wdth or without slavery, as 
the people of each State asking admission may de¬ 
sire. Such was the description of the people to w^hom 
I reierred in nay Berks county letter. 

Any other construction of the letter would render 
it cseentially iaconsiatent with iteelf. Having urgetl 
the adoption of the Missouri Compromise, the infer¬ 
ence is irresistible tliat Congress, in my opinion, pos 
sesses the pnwer to legislate upon the subject of sla¬ 
very in the Territories. What au absurdity w-’ould it 
then be, if, whdst asserting this sovereign power in I 
Congress, which power (rom its nature must be ex- | 
elusive, 1 should in the very same breath also claim { 
this identical power “for the population of aTerrito- ! 
ry in an unorganized capacity ?” 

In conclusion, I desire to reiterate and reaffirm 
every eentimentcontained in my Berks county letter. 

I cling to tho Missouri Compromise with greater te¬ 
nacity tlian ever, and yet firrnly bdiev'e that it will be 
adopted by Congi-ess. 

Yours, very respectiully, 

JAM158 BUCHANAN, 

T, SAjroFOBD, E»q. 

Mr. HOUSTON, Will the gentleman permit me 
to ask him a question ? Does he hold that Con- 
gi-ess does or does not have the power to legislate 
upon the subject of slavery in the Territories ? 

Mr. FOSTER. I hold that Congress has no such 
power. 

Mr. HOUSTON. Does the gentleman hold that j 
Congress has no power to legislate for the protec- ' 
tion of slave property ? 

Mr. FOSTER. If tho gentleman will have a lit- ! 
tie jiatience, he shall have iny views upon that 
snbjeot in an nnmistakaWe form. 


Mr. HOUSTON. Tho gentleman is trying to 
make a point on the fact that Mr. Buchanan, in 
his Saridford letter, according to tho gentleman’s 
version of it, admits the power of Congress to le¬ 
gislate on the subject of slavery in th^ Territories. 
Now, I presume, if tho gentleman from Georgia 
v/ili reflect for a moment, he will see that Congress 
has the power to legislate upon the subject of sla¬ 
very to the extent of protecting and regulating 
that species of property. 1 understand Mr. Bu¬ 
chanan’s position to be just that. Not that it has 
the power to abolish slavery there. We have no 
power to legislate slavery into a Territory or out 
of it. I would like the gentleman from Georgia to 
say whether he does not hold that doctrine? I 
want him to answer the question whether Con¬ 
gress has the power to legislate for the protection 
of slavery in the Territories? 

Mr. FOSTER." I do not want the gentleman to 
mar the proportions of the speech I am endeavor¬ 
ing to make, nor exhaust the time allotted me 
with his irrelevant matter. Has not Mr. Buchanan 
asserted sovereign'^ and cxckinve power in Con¬ 
gress over the whole subject of slavery in the Ter¬ 
ritories? And has it not been adii-fitted, as I have 
already said, that if that power exists in Congress, 
then the people have it to admit or exclude slavery ? 
Does not Mr. Van Buren show how and for what 
that power is to be used ? 

Mr. HOUSTON. I hope the gentleman will, 
before he attempts to play Yankee with me, an¬ 
swer tlie question I put to him. I >7ill answer his 
questions, if he will give me the opportunity. But 
I insist that he shall not evade the question I put 
to him by asking another. 

Mr. FOSTER. I’il answer the gentleman if he 
will only keep quiet. Does enforcing the princi¬ 
ples of the Missouri Compromise line include only 
legislation for the protection of slave property ? 
Is the Wilmot Proviso a measure fw the protec¬ 
tion of slave property in tho Territories ? If eo, 
then Mr. Buchanan may only mean that Congress, 
with the sovereign and exclusive^'' over tho 

subject, can only legislate for the protection of 
slave property. Whenever the people can be made 
to believe that, to drive out or set ffee slaves taken 
to a Territory, is legislation to protect slave prop¬ 
erty, they may be prepared to see Mr. Buchanan’s 
position in the light in which the gentleman pre¬ 
sents it. 

And now, Mr. Chairman, I ask gentlemen to 
look at the fruits of this new doctrine. The Ter¬ 
ritories opened with the understanding at tho 
North that the first-comers were to dete ’mine the 
character of their domestic institutions, with a 
strong determination in that quarter that no more 
territory should be appropriated to slave labor, 
and this begetting on the part of the South a 
counter-determination that they would not be thus 
driven from the common property of all, a collision 
ensued. The result is familiar to all; for every 
wind that has blown frona Kansas since we have 
been in session has been laden with wars and ru¬ 
mors of wars. 

Mr. OLIVER, of Missouri. VThat does the geu- 
lleinaii mean by wars and rumora of wars ? 

Mr. FOSTER. I mean that we have had a great 
many rumors of war in Kansas, whether tliey be 
true or not. 













7 




Mr. OT'^ Wbat does the gentleman mean 

for i.ati, , which I hav* made allusionV 
“ Enters X meaT this: If you open the 
At her las^ ■ ^ > there are two opposing interests, 
and say to the , arties in interest, tlm first that gets 
the manageuieut of affah s shall determine the char¬ 
acter of your oinestic institutions, you may expect 
just such see '.es to occur as hare been reported to 
have occurre i in Kansas. 

Mr. OLIV. IR. Is that what you mean ? 

Mr. FOST- -R. Yes, sir; that is v/bat I mean. 

Mr. OLIV’^IR. Very well. Go on. 

Mr. FOSTllR. I repeat, what else could you 
■•xpect from tueh a state of things? As I before 
.’emarked, in the arrangement of the Kansas bill, 
as understood by the North, no principle was abated 
on their part. They gave up no right to exclude 
slaver}" from the Territories. The question was 
not settled ; it was only transferred. 11 while the 
question wns kept here you had wais of words, 
what else could you look for when the same ques- 
! ion was sent to the plains of Kansas to be settled 
) y the greatest speed and the stoutest arm? 
i Now, if any man at the South supposes that any- 
, hing was accomplished for his interest by the pas¬ 
sage of the Kansas bill, with the Northern con- 
iptruction of it; or that there is any party at the 
North who do not desire to see Kansas a free State, 
he is laboring under a very great mistake. The 
feeling of the great body of the North is against 
us on the subject of slavery. And even the fair 
men there, who will stand by us upon the Consti¬ 
tution, had, nevertheless, rather see the Territo¬ 
ries made into free than into slave States. They 
would use no unfitir means to accomplish that ob¬ 
ject, but, at the same time, would avail themselves 
of the advantages which result from the doctrine 
we have been discussing. What, then, can the 
South expect from such a state of things? Will 
any sane man be willing to risk the tenure of his 
slave property in a Territory so situated as to make 
it doubtful as to v/hich side will have the ascend¬ 
ency, all the while subject to have it swept from 
him by an act of Territorial legislation ? Of course, 
under such circumstances, no man would settle 
with his slaves and make improvements. The 
South must either surrender all doubtful territory, 
or hold it by force of arms. 

Are not those men at the North who sustained 
the Kansas bill upon the ground that it was a good 
measure for freedom, in the right ? It was charged 
that Mr. Pierce was in favor of making Kansas a 
free State, and 1 am not prepared to deny that 
charge. But was he not in sympathy with the 
large majority of the supporters of the bill at the 
North on this subject ? I might multiply instances 
all over the North, if it were necessary to do so. 
Mr. Pierce’s organ at Concord, N. IT,, held the fol¬ 
lowing language: 

“ All the valuable land open to settlement is al- 
readv * btaked out’ and ‘ claimed,’ and eternal decrees 
oould nU make freedom more certain. 

“ Noris this the beginning and end of the chapter, 
though Ihis might be thonght enough by any reason¬ 
able inai. It is now proclaimed by anti-Nebraska 
papers tlat, such is the rush of emigration in this 
direction! that, like the tuo abundant rains which 
fcW'eU rivys, it w'ill overflow its natural bounds, and, 
passing tic immense territory of Texas, make two or 
r-hr^e new\rce States ov<t of soil wMok had been dew- 


ted to slave^^y! German emigrants are universally 
anti-slavcr}' nen, both from principle and taste, 
being unable to endure contact with the colored race; 
and, already occupying the western part of Texas, 
they will unite w’ith the emigrants from Uie North 
and West in organizingStates on the soil of 
slavery! 

“ Nor is this all, great and good as it is. R is 
staUd that MissouH is atvabening to thoughts of free- 
dom. Slavery was never strong there, and is mainlr 
confined to the rich bottom lauds of the Mississippi, 
while the western portion of the State is almost ex¬ 
clusively occupied by free men. During the last few 
years, the number of slaves has been diminishing as 
things that were; and now, when the Stale shall be 
nearly surrounded by free States, and fM escape of 
slaves be-corne so easy, and when so large a portion of 
the people are opposed to it, both from interest and, 
principle, it is thought by those well acquainted with 
the state of public feeling that slavery will give way 
to surrounding circumstances, and Missouri itself 
join the sisterhood of free Slates around her! Should 
twt such prospects satisfy the most zeedous Abolitionist f 
Should not the part only which is moral certainty 
create the most devout thanksgiving? Utah, New 
Mexico, Nebraska, the territory of a dozon future in¬ 
dependent States, and Kansas, all sure to be free, be¬ 
sides two or three to be carved from Texas, and 
M issouri itself to be free! Who could expect so much ? 
Who asks for more? The Abolitionists have haran¬ 
gued for freedom, preach ed for freedom, and, as they 
say, prayed for freedom over this vast territory. 
Should they not thank Ileuven and he content when 
they received what they asked ? 

“ Indeed, they now admit, almost without an ex¬ 
ception, that such results have been secured by the 
Nebraska bill — grand, permanent, and glori¬ 
ous —such as no single act of Congress has ever be¬ 
fore secured.” 

Governor Wright, of Indiana, within a very 
short time, said it was the best kind of a Wilmofc 
proviso. Now, these are from Kansas, Nebraska 
men at the North. I furnish them, not to prove 
that these men are unsound, but to show v^hat 
their interpretation of the Kansas bill is; and to 
satisfy all those at the South who fear the restora¬ 
tion of the Missouri line, that their apprehensions 
are groundless. Why, I ask again, ^louid they 
restore it? No, sir, as I said at the outset, the 
game of the Republican party is not to restore, 
but to drive the whole North to their construction 
of the Kansas act, and then, in the language of the 
New Hampshire Kansas editor, “ overflow their 
natural bounds,” &c. What is to be done if more 
territory should be added in the Southwest? Is 
this same war for the power to rule to be without 
end? Would the men of the South tamely sub¬ 
mit to an avalanche from the North into Southern 
territory to pass laws in advance against slavery, 
so that it might never have a foothold there ? Let 
men pause and reflect. To illustrate some of the 
difficulties this construction of the Kansas bill has 
thrown in our way, I will give you some of my 
own experience. I have urged at different times 
since I have been here, upon some of the more 
reasonable of the Republicans, the impropriety of 
their having, through aid societies and otherwise, 
atte>npted to take Kansas, whether or no, and there¬ 
by bring about the unhappy state of things in that 
Territory. They reply to this, that whatever may 
be thought of the policy of their extraordinary ef¬ 
forts to possess Kansas, that it was lawful, and 
that they had only comi>lied with what they con- 







8 


sidered a kind of promise held out by those who 
pressed that measure upon Congress, and some of 
them Southern men at that, in their declarations 
that the North ought not to complain, that she had 
the most people, could emigrate with less difficulty 
than the men of the South, and, therefore, were 
bound to make Kansas a free State. They claim 
that they are only laboring for a full execution of 
the law, and in the spirit in which they were invited 
to do so. With the present received construction 
of that act, I confess it is not so easy to meet that 
argument. 

Mr. HOUSTON. I wish to ask the gentleman a 
question. 

Mr. FOSTER. The gentleman will be brief, as 
my time is very shnrt. 

Mr. IIOU^STON. I would not interrupt the gen¬ 
tleman if he had not spoken of what has been said 
by Southern Democrats here on the passage of the 
Kansas-Nsbraska act. If he does not wish to have 
a reply to w’hat he says, then he ought not to quote 
from papers and letters which he has not with him, 
•and the exact purport of which he does not recol¬ 
lect. 

Mr. POSTER. Whatever paper or letter I have 
referred to in my speech I shall print with my pub¬ 
lished remarks, and this is a full answer to the 
gentleman. He need have no apprehension that 
anything will be concealed. I am merely making 
commentaries on what papers I refer to. 

Mr. HOUSTON. The gentleman’s commenta¬ 
ries may be wrong. 

Mr. FOSTER. If the text is riglit, the com¬ 
mentaries, if wrong, will hurt nobody. 

Mr. HOUSTON. My question is this: The gen¬ 
tleman presents as an evidence of the fact that the 
Kansas-Nebraeka bill was urged by Northern 
Democrats, as a measure of freedom, that they ar¬ 
gued before the people of the North that, having a 
larger population, they could sooner settle up the 
Territory .and make their regulations to suit them¬ 
selves.' Now, does the gentleman see, and will he 
not candidly acknowledge, that this is not an argu¬ 
ment in favor of abolition—not in favor of slavery, 
but in favor of the justice of the principle imbodied 
in the bill that the people of the Territory, those 
who go there to settle and make it their home, 
shall be perfectly free to frame their institutions in 
their own way? It is a measure of justice and not 
of abolition. 

Mr. FOSTER. What I say is, that the construc¬ 
tion of the Kansas bill, as held by Mr. Buchanan 
and his friends, that Congress, possessing the 
power, and having transferred it to the people of 
the Territory, that they may act now, while in a 
territorial character, upon their domestic institu¬ 
tions. I ^ay it is the doctrine held by Mr. Buch¬ 
anan and his friends upon this subject which has 
produced the unnatural hot growth in Kansas and 
brought all this trouble and gloomy apprehension 
upon the country. 

Mr. WARNER. When my colleague says that 
Mr. Buchanan’s friends hold that doctrine, he does 
not intend to include me ? 

Mr. FOSTER; Certainly not. My colleague 
has not come out yet upon that question. I only 
refer to those who have come out. 

Mr. WARNER. I have come out. I have de¬ 
claimed mv views to the House. 


Mr. FOSTER. I was not apprized of the fact, 
as I did not hear my colleague’s speech. 

But I have been asked wiiat were Mr. Fil^> | 
views upon.this question ? 

Well, sir, I think I can at least furnish such pfooit 
as ought to satisfy Democracy. It will be remem¬ 
bered. Mr. Chairmau, tliat tit the opening of Con¬ 
gress, when we were endeavoring to elect a pre¬ 
siding officer for this House, and the South Ameri¬ 
cans were voting for the distinguished gentleman 
from Penn.sylvania, [Mr. 11. M. Fuller,] that our 
Democratic friends became exceedingly unhappy 
at the prospect of our depravity. They said that 
Fillmore and his party were unsound on the negro 
question—not that Mr. Fillmore had done anything 
to forfeit the good opinion they liad once had of 
him, but because the gentleman from Penusylvama 
was his chosen organ, and that Fillmore and his 
friends must be judged by him. They made 
speeches, and wrote letters, and had the country 
in a perfect fever on the subject. Well, in due 
time, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. H, M. 
Fuller] made up his record, and it has gone be¬ 
fore the world; and I am perfectly willing that 
Mr. Fillmore shall be judged by that record. W^bat 
does he say ? He says: 

“ I w^ould have preferred that the legislation ot 
the 33d Congress had not been enacted, and that the 
people of all sections should have abided by the com¬ 
promise of 1820, as a measure of repose, because, 
under the compromises of 1850, peace, quiet, and 
social harmony had been generally restored, ft 
might have averted the unhappy difficulties existing 
in Kansas—would have saved- the country the long 
scene of disorganization through which we have re¬ 
cently passed. I would have let the compromise ot 
1820 alone; and did not favor the repeal, because I 
believed its effect, upon the public mind of the coun¬ 
try, would produce injury and mischief greater tlian 
any good it could possibly attain. 

“Now that the repealing act has been passed, we 
have, as practical legislators, to meet the existing 
facts, and a different state of case. We are not called 
upon to abide by past legislation, but we are asked 
to legislate anew for the establishment of the restric¬ 
tive clause, under the plea of aiestoratiou of the 
status quo before the Kansas bill was passed. Thtl 
restoration is rmo wipossibte. To atimpt it can onLp 
prod/uce irritation, sectional alienalioti, and a disturb¬ 
ance of the public peace of the cw.mtry. 

“ Practically, so far as the extension of slavery is 
concerned, the Soutli has gained nothing; the North 
has lost nothing by its repeal. It is conceded, I be¬ 
lieve, by intelligent men of all sections familiar with 
the country, that neither the soil, or the climate, or the 
natural productions of the Territories thus thrown 
open, can offer any permanent inducement for slave¬ 
ry to enter tliero. The cotton planter, the su.gar 
grower, and the rice producer, will not feel it his in¬ 
terest to leave his own warmer latitude, where, in 
the millions of acres of unoccupied territory, lie has 
ample n om for present as well as pi*osi>ective ex¬ 
pansion. The law of interest—the irrepealable law 
of nature—must operate there as everywhere. True, 
there is now a heated and angry controversy in die 
Territory of Kansas. The men of the Wder, in r.ai- 
ural antagonism wnth aid societies elsewhere, hive 
been stimulated to assoc ated effort for the purpose 
of its establishment. Men may engage in, but will 
not continue, a struggle of unproductive labor. 
If this be true of Kansas, it cannot be less so of 
braska. But whether slavery will go into Kansas or 
not—whether it will go into 'Nebraska or not—is a 
question I’ishall leave with the citizens who reede in 







9 


those Territories to determiue for themselves, when . 
they come to f >rui their State constitution and apply I 
for admission into the Union. i 

“ Enterhiining these viev.'s, on the 19th of Decern- ; 
her last T declared, in the House, that I would vote 
for the admission of Kansas with nr without slavery. 

* Tir * * -H* * 

“ My declar-^tiou, in substance, was. that I would 
vote for the admission of States wiliiout reference to 
the question of slavery. What is the past historypf 
the Government? Eighteen new States have been 
admitted—nine free, nine slave. It has thus been 
nine times solemnly aliirmed, that it is no objection 
to the admission of a State that its constitution re¬ 
cognises slavery. It has been as often aftirmed that 
it is no objection to the admission ot a State that its 
constitution p.ohibits slaveiy.” 

Any squatter sovereignty tliere? 'Would the 
doctrine therein embraced applied to Kansas 
have produced any of the troubles wliicli 
have come upon that Territory? Xo, sir—no! If 
in good fitith all parties had ujaderstood that the 
Territories were the common property of all, held 
by the General Government as the common agent 
of all the parties concerned, with no power either 
in the government or in the people of the Territo¬ 
ries, while in a territorial state, to establish or ex¬ 
clude slavery, the government the while as an im¬ 
partial agent, seeing to it that my property in 
Georgia was as much to be protected in the Terri¬ 
tory as the property of the man of Massachusetts ; 
and when tlie requisite number of inhabitants were 
there to authorize tluj formation of a State consti¬ 
tution, preparatory to coming into the Union, the 
right of the bona fide citizens to either include or 
exclude slavery from their constitution, I say, Mr. 
Chairman, with such doctrine as that applied to 
Kansas, you would have heard cf no difficulties 
there. 

Immigration would have gone in the natural 
way. Men from all sections would have met there 
to settle the country, and build up its institutions. 
Their domestic policy would have been discussed 
in a spirit of conciliation, and the institutions would 
have been made to conform to the true interests 
of the people. It does not matter where they 
migl'.t liave emigrated from ; left free to act for i 
themselves, with the lights of experience before 1 
them, they would, as the proper time rolled round, j 
Imve acted for their own interests, independent of | 
all extraneous inftuences. This is our doctrine, 
and was, as I understood it, the doctrine of the 
people whom I left, some five months ago, of all 
parties. But this is not all the testimony I have 
on this point, of Mr. Fillmore’s soundness. I un¬ 
derstand the Democratic National Committee have j 
sent out thousands of the letters of Senators Pratt , 
and Pearce of Maryland. 

I suppose they wnll not object to being held to ! 
the doctrine that they shall not be allowed to irn- ' 
peach their own witnesses. Governor Pratt not 
only says Mr. Fillnaore is sound, but that he has a 
sound party ; and the only thing, it w'ould seem, 
that alarms the Senator i.s, that the party is not 
large enough; but that it is good, as far as it goes, 
he bears testimony. The other point we will try 
and supply. Senator Pearce pays Mr. Fillmore one 
of the handsomest compl; ents he has had. lie 
attributes his w'ant of popularity at tlie North to j 
his patriotic administration. Now, sir, after adopt- i 
ing these witnesses tbemselves, it does not lie in ! 


their mouth to say one word against Mr. X'iliraorc. 
And yet there are speeches shipped olf from here 
by the cart load, filled with all manner of abuse of 
that good man, and no doubt in many instances 
both the speeches and letters alluded to, sent under 
the same frank, I tell gentlemen, in all serious¬ 
ness, that the people will soon be brought to the 
point that they will not believe anything they'tell 
them. 

Mr. Fillmore needs no endorser to commend him 
to the people of the country. He stands upon his 
own past administration as liis platform, and hold¬ 
ing the constitution so as to cover North and 
South, East and West, under its ample folds, he 
submits his claims to all who love their country 
better than party—all who have patriotism enough 
to look beyond the agitations of a 8e(tion—beyond 
the spoils of office, to the best means of restoring 
the harmony of all sections without trenching on 
the peculiar rights of either. If ever there was a 
time when vve should be willing to look beyond 
mere party triumph in the choice of a Chief Mag¬ 
istrate, in my judgment, it is now. No mere par¬ 
ty President can bring peace at this time. It 
matters not which section elects, nor how good in 
himself the chosen one may be, if he comes into 
the Presidency by the votes mainly from one of 
the opposing sections of the Union, supported in 
Congre.ss by the men of tliat .section,* he cannot 
administer the government so as to promote hai’- 
mony. His enemies will see him wrong however 
right he may be, and his friends tvill be exacting, 
in the proportion in adverse ratio of the area of a 
Congressional district to the breadth of a whole 
Union. This is no time for sectional Presidents, 
unless we have made up our minds to give up the 
Union without another efibrt to make it worth 
preserving. And it is useless to disguise the fact 
tliat there is now the most imminent peril right in 
our pathway. Mr. Fillmore ha.^ served us in jusi 
such an emergency. He then had the courage and 
the patriotism to convert his robes of office inuo 
“ robes of ice,” and, forgetting all else, to steer 
the good ship to the haven of .safety. 

There are few men capable of doing just as he 
did. Others may do as well. Is this the time to 
make tl}e experiment? Will be do again as he 
has done before? Yes, sir. I hioio just as well 
as it is possible to know before hand, what a man 
of honor, and trutli, and integrity, and THE MOST 
EXALTED PATRIOTISM will do in the future; 
that his Administration now would bn as accepta¬ 
ble to all sections as it was in 185n-\^l-’o2. His 
election would now restore peace to the country 
in one month, without the violation of any law or 
the infringement of the rights of any section.— 
And my firm couviction i q i» we could read the 
liearts of men as docs Omniscience, that Mr. Fill¬ 
more would be put into the Presidential chair bj 
the acclamation of the people. 

But I am to be told, “ you can’t elect Mr. Fill- 
mere, and, jtherefore, you ought to vote for Mr. 
Buchanan.” I have no patience loft lor bucli ar¬ 
guments as that. 

How do I know “ we can’t elect him,’’ till we 
try ? We all know if his friends all vote for some¬ 
body else that he can’t be elected. 

I do not brlievo that any well-informed maii 
will doubt but that, if all the m^-.u in the hTnion, 






10 


'rilo rcallv prefer Mr. Filhuorc, wore to vote for 
iiint, that be would bo elected. Then, why this 
chicken hearted” course? Ho your duly wliat- 
cver others may do. But, sir, what do "we sain if 
we vote for Mr. Buchanan and elect him? We 
shall not restore harmony by that act, as 1 have 
already sljown. Shall we establish any great prin¬ 
ciple by elebting him? Yes, sir, we shall estab¬ 
lish that Congress has “SOVEREIGN AND EX- 
CIiUSIVE ” power over the subject of slavery in 
the Territories. And further, that Congress hav¬ 
ing that power, transmitted it to the people, and 
that the first comers into any Territory may elect 
a Legislature and exclude slavery therefrom. This, 
I say, we establish beyond “doubt or cavil.’' 

Now, sir, if the^ Democratic party had run Mr. 
Buchanan simply as Mr. Buchanan, though I never 
admired him as a politician, yet, in an emergency, 
to get all bands together at the South for the final 
struggle, bitter as the pill would have been I 
would have voted for him. 1 could have done 
that and compromised no principle, because he 
would then have been run without any declaration 
at all. Or if he v,’ere run simply upon the Cincin¬ 
nati platform, Jsnus a.s it was, the South could 
have voted for him without sacrifice, because she 
could still have contended for her own meaning of 
the Kansas-Nebraska bill. And, sir, as an evi¬ 
dence that I was unwilling to throw so much 
as a straw in the way of any arrangement which 
promised any good to the country, and especially 
to the South, I did not open my mouth. My own 
people complained of my silence; but I had a 
duty to perform above party. I had no personal 
ambition to gratify. I was here, not by any seek¬ 
ing on my part, but, haviug taken the respojisibil- 
itV, it was my duty to serve not gratify my people. 
Weil, Mr. Buchanan wrote his letter. lie con¬ 
strued the only plank in the platform that attracted 
public attention, lie gave the platform a voice, 
and it spoke to the nation. I waited to hear the 
language of rebuke from the South. 1 knew that 
party fetters were hard to break, but that the 
voice of that platform was strange music in Geor¬ 
gia- Well, sir, that rebuke did not come. 

Faint gleams of lightning it is true, and subdued 
loutterings, but no thunder tones. Well, as soon 
as the Southern patient had gotten over the qualms 
of the first dose, and become prepared for almost 
any drug known to the political dispensatory, Mr. 
Van Buren takes him in hand. I have been at 
s»dme loss to know exactly what trick the magician 
was up to—whether he intends to take revenge 
upon the South for her repudiation of himin 1840, 
by the less manly but more successful mode of se¬ 
cret poison, or leally has ambition to see once more 
his name and blood “ lord of the mansion,'’ I arn 
unable to divine, lie s eaks “ to the record,” and 
almoat by authority, and puts the matter beyond 
“ doubt or cavil.” 

I paused to see w'hether Mr. Buchanan would 
speak, or by his silence acquiesce in the commen¬ 
tary. He remained “ silent as the grave.” This 
was bad enough, but the cup ran over w'hen, in- 
otoad of that letter of Mr. Van Buren arousing the 
whole South to a sense of the quicksands into 
wliich they w^ere being cm-ried, the Democratic 
party actually grew giddy with delight. Let me 
give you one or two specimens. Here is one from 


one of their journals of standing, and in good fri 
lowship with the party in Georgia: 

“Martin Van Buren and liis son John are out for 
Buchanan. The former in a letfc and the latter in 
a spicy speech reported in the New ^'ork papers. 
We believe this will secure New' York to the Demo- 
cradc lickot The Vati Biuer.s have been leaders 
among the Soft Shell Democra. y, and their support 
of the ticket augurs well for the union of the paity 
in ihaf State. In taking this step, ihey are compelled 
to back from their former position bn the slavery 
question. — Jia/iner. 

Back indeed ! J said they v:ere giddy. Charity 
requires us to believe that the editor wrote the ar¬ 
ticle before he read the letter. Carrying New 
York for Democracy seemed to be the one idea 
that filled bis mind. Right upon the heel of that 
another leading journal, at the capital of the State, 
endorses the letter as -a “ patriotic letter.” 

Why patriotic? Is it because be smells loss of 
the Buffalo platform thifi he did in 1848? Hear 
him: 

“ My own course in regard to it (slavery in the 
Territories) has been one, by tue record of which I 
shall always be willing to be judged, whenever and 
wherever ihe acts of an individual are deemed of 
sufficient importance to attract attention.” 

Patriotic ! Why ? Because he thinks Congress 
has no power to give the people of the Territories 
power to exclude slavery? Hear him again: 

“ I have not the slightest doubt of the power of 
Congress to give this authority to the people of the 
Territories.” 

Why, again I ask, is that letter thought to be 
patriotic by Southern Democracy ? Is it because 
in illustrating a principle throughout his whole 
letter he uses the words exclude slavery every 
time, and inclnde never? No, no, Mr. Chairman, 
Mr. Van Buren said he w ould vote for Mr. Bucha¬ 
nan—that was enough. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I ask how any Southern 
man can vote for Mr. Buchanan without commit¬ 
ting himself to the power in Congress to legislate 
on the subject of slavery in the Territories? What 
will be the effect of that? I want every Southern 
man to reflect upon this point. There is no obli¬ 
gation on the North not to transfer the question 
of power from the Territories back to the halls of 
Congress. If, in future years, we shall acquire 
more territory from Mexico, and the North, think¬ 
ing the chance is better than in Congress than in 
the Territories; if they find that they cannot 
“ overflow their natural boundaries” sufficiently 
to accomplish their purpose, and come back to 
Congress, to exclude slavery, how can any man 
who now supports Mr. Buchanan open his mouth 
against that claim? Now', do not get one side of 
this point. It is not because Mr. Buchanan be¬ 
lieves in the power simply which binds you—IT 
IS BECAUSE HE MAKES THOSE OPINIONS 
YOUll PLATFORM, and you endorse it. You 
make the Kansas bill your platform—he puts 
words into the mouth of that measure, not what 
you think it ought to say, but ycKV not only do not 
contradict that language, but endorse it by your 
vote. This answers all the appeals w'hich have 
been made to ino to come to the support of Mr. 
Buchanan. Wc are upon the eve of a great bat¬ 
tle. What will be its result I cannot tell. But 
when the din shall have died away, and the smoke 











11 


y tlear-ed up, if thy Union ia left, I want at least to 
bo left with (roe limbs and untrammelled tongue 
\ when the next battle is to be fonglit for the South. 
A And I wfiat it di.stinctly understood, that the chief 
to whom 1 do homage, must have other aida-de- 
-camp tliiui the Messrs. Yan Buren. Why, sir, if 
Mr. Buchauaa should be elected, and appoint Mr. 
Vau Biu-en as Secretary of State, and send John 
Minister to England; no Southern man would have 
a right to open has mouth. 

Mr. W'RiGfIT, of Mississippi. I would ask the 
gentleman from Georgia if, by any extraordinary 
contingency or luysterious d spensation of Provi¬ 
dence, Mr. Fillmoro should be elected, and should 
appoint Mr. Moouk, vfho stood by Mr. Banks in 
the election for Speaker, or Mr. I)unn, or Mr. Bay- 
Asi.> Clauk, whether or not he w'ould repudiate 
\ the American party ? 

) Sir. FOSTEil. Providence does sometimes in- 
/ terpose in mercy to save from the follies of men. 
^ Mr. Chairman, gintiemen seem to be slow to see 
[ a point. Now, I make no point on Mr. Buchanan, 

• beeauso unsound men vote for him. He is at lib- 
j erty to get all the votes he can. I have not yet 
he^rd either of the gentlemen referred to pretend 
to speak for Mr. Fillmore, or to explain his posi¬ 
tion. 

Mr. V/BIGHT. Mr. Bunn is a Fillmore elector 
for Indiana. 

Mr, FOSTER. That does not change the case 
at all. I say again, that I make no point on any 
man because he may get lu^sound men’s votes. Nor 
would I, under some circumstances, condemn a 
raau for appointing to office one who differed 
from him. I s-aid you would have no right to com¬ 
plain if Mr. Van Buren were appointed. Now, 
the difference in tlie c.ases before us is, that Messrs. 
Mooni:, Bunn, and Clark, either differ or agree 
with Mr. Fillmore. If they differ w ith him, and 
ho appoint them, his friends have a right to cora- 
plain ; but if he and they openly agree before the 
election, and he then appoint them, I for one will 
not complain. Now, Mr. Van Buren openly takes 
position with Mr, Buchanan—stands upon his plat- 
ioHn—makes it say the same thing. Mr. Buchan¬ 
an and his friends not only do not repudiate, but 
endorse, as I have shown. Why, then, should 
they find fault? Is not Mr, Van Burea in full fel¬ 


lowship? Has ho not written a “ patriotic letter?’ 
Will not he and John, at the head of the Softs, 
secure “New York to the DemocratsV” Bo they 
usually wmrk iu politics for fun ? Will they not 
think the “ laborer worthy of his hire ” if they 
should “socure New York to the Democrats?” I 
t-liink I wag quite modest in the places I have as¬ 
signed them. I should think a man of the calibre 
of either of them, with New York at his back, and 
in “full faith and practice” of Democracy, miglit 
well aspire to the first office in your gift. But my 
time is almost gone. How much have I Mr. Chair¬ 
man ? 

CHAIRMAN. Three minutes only. 

Mr. FOSTER. I did want to examine a little 
o see what sort of a party at the North w’as to be 
built up by taking hold of the Democratic nomi¬ 
nee. 1 have been told for years, sir, that the old 
Whig party North was rotten, and the Democracy 
sound. They said—“ Just clear the track of old 
Federal, blue-light, abolition Whigs, and thee, 
stand still and see the salvation of the Democratic 
party.” Well, the track was pretty well cl ared, 
and what has been the result ? By looking into 
the history of the thing a little, I find that in. at 
least two or three States at the North, the “ back¬ 
bone” Democratic districts—districts which gave 
Mr. Pierce from 1,500 to 5,000 majorities, erenow 
all represented by Republicans, with majorities at 
their backs of from three to seven thousand. Aud, 
what is a singular fact, I learn that in Ohio, the 
districts now claimed with most confidence by the 
Democracy, are some of the eld Whig distucts. 
But that is not all. The tune has changed. We 
hear no more of “ old Federal, blue-light, abolition 
Whigs.” And, in fact, I have not heard much 
very recentlv of “ dark lantern.” But now it is 
“GYLLANT old Whig party”—“ GLORIOUS 
old Whig party”—“ PATRIOTIC AMERICANS” 
—and the cry has become almost Macedonian— 
“Come over and help us!” “Help!” help !!’’^ 
“ help !!! ” “ everybody run here.” Why, what 
on earth is the matter ? Is there any foreign ene¬ 
my on our shores ? Have Indians broke out ?.— 
“ No, no, worse than that; there is mutiny in the 
Democratic camp. Come and help us manage our 
friends, or the country is- lost.” [Here the ham¬ 
mer fell.] 


A D D E N D A. 


Hr. Foster’s speech having overrun the eight 
pages into which it was proposed to compress 
it, and not filling up a pamphlet of sixteen pa- 
geii, we, Lave, with his approbation^ concluded 
to insert a recent letter of Senator Houston of 
Texas, together with the roscautious of an 


American meeting held at Greenville, Butler 
county, Alabama, on the Ifth of this month, 
and the editorial comments of the Americayi 
Organ thereupon, from the dUiiy Organ of this 
date, 18th August, 185.6. 










12 


Jl 


(lien. Sani Hoaslon on the Presidency. 

WA;-:nrNOTON City, July 21, 1856. 

My Dkar Sib: Yo.ir letter of the 27th of June, 
ultimo, addrcRsed to me at Huntsville, did not 
•reach me until my arrival here. I thank you for 
your kind sentiments, and I assure you I recipro¬ 
cate all you have expressed. Any apology was 
unnecessary for addressing me on political sulyects, 
as they are now ho interesting to the public as well 
as to individuals, I thank you for your views and 
suggestions, and will render mine witli perfect free¬ 
dom and fidelity. You say, iu speaking of your¬ 
self, that “having been reared almost beneath the 
shades of the Hermitage, and in every sense a 
Democrat, I feel all the reverence and confidence 
in the principles and integrity of the motives that 
actuated General Jackson in his political course 
Lhat I should do. The issues formerly dividing 
the old Whig and Democratic parties may no lon¬ 
ger be said to exist, 3 'et there is a difference in 
principle, arising out of the interpretation of the 
Constitution of the United States, that must con¬ 
tinue to exist as long as our present form of gov¬ 
ernment continues.” 

Now let us veil ct for a moment, and observe 
that I, too, if not reared “ beneath the shades oi' 
the Hermitage,” was taught under the pure, vigor¬ 
ous, and national Democratic teachings of the rev¬ 
ered and brave old chief, whose wisdom brought 
honesty, purity, and vigor into the public service, 
with strength, love of union, honor, and renown 
to the whole country. I marched with that old 
chief, and kept step with his Democracy through¬ 
out his public life ; and since he departed I have 
never deviated for a moment from his principles; 
and, I tell you, you can say most truly, that not 
only the Lssues formerly dividing the old Wiiig 
and Democratic p;trties, can no longer be said to 
have any practical existence, but that those par¬ 
ties themselves have no distinctive character.— 
They have faded, become extinct, and expired. 

One, the Whig party lives only in the memory 
of its great name, its great abilities, and its great 
failures to accomplish practical results ; the other, 
although it retains the name of Democracy, has 
no memories to which the present organization 
can refer without a blush of shame. The Democ¬ 
racy of to-day is a “compound” of heterogeneous 
materials ; it has dwindled down to mere section¬ 
alism, and i.s now but a faction. It has lost the 
principle of cohesion, and boasts no longer a uniform 
policy. When itToIloweri with us the Hag of the 
“ old chief ” it had a consistency of principle and 
firmness of purpose which always accompanies a clear 
conviction of right. It had clear heads, patriotic 
hearts, and clean hands ever ready in its support. 
It spoke wisdom and quiet at home, and eveiy 
section rejoiced in our general prosperity; it an-' 
nounced its foreign policy, and negotiations abroad 
were no farther necessary than to communicate 
that announcement. 

Where is that Democracy to-day? .'wallowed 
up in unmitigated squatter sovereignty—in sec¬ 
tional hickering.s and disputes—iu disregarding 
compaefcfi between the different sections of the 
Union, the repeal of which has led to insurrection 
in Kansas—iu getting up Indian wars, wherever 
Indians could be found, as a pretext tor increasing 
the regular ar?7iy, the estimated expenses of which 


at this time arc $lli.600,000 per annum, when 
i $300,000 judiciously expended would secure peace 
! with every Indian tribe on the continent, and in¬ 
duce them to embrace the arts of civilization. 

The foreign police of the present Democratic 
President has been far from creditable to our gov¬ 
ernment. It, too, has sliown a disposition to court 
an alien influence to sustain it, v/hile it has de- 
claned and practised relentless proscription against 
native-born American citizens. I will pursue this 
point no further. To ruminate upon it is painful 
enough for a man who loves his country, but w'-hen 
called upon by friends, I feel it due to them to ex¬ 
press ray sentiments plainly. You and I, and tens 
of thousands of old Democrats who, were the 
true Covenanters under Jacicsou, wash our hands 
of these absurdities, follies, and evidences of cul¬ 
pable misraaiiagenient, 

None of these things are fraught with the prin¬ 
ciples of that Democracy which was taught at the 
i; Hermitage, and treasured up by us. I can find no 
I relief in the nomination made at Cincinnati. I 
I regard the gentleman upon whom it fell as a man 
of abilities, and one with whom I have always 
maintained kind personal relations; and for Mr. 
Buchanan I yet entertain the highest respect.— 
From his antecedents, I cannot regard him as 
more patriotic and national than Mr. Fillmore.— 
In the ofiice of President, one has been tried, the 
other has not. It is matter of astonishment to 
me that the nomination happened to fall to the 
lot of Mr. Buchanan, w'hen other names,- as I have 
learned, were used on the* occasion, who had 
been the active advocates of the Kansas-Xebraska 
bill, which had been declared to be the main issue 
in the approaching Presidential contest. That 
plunk is prominent in the platform, and the plat¬ 
form has been accepted, cordially, by the nomi¬ 
nee. We have to regard squatter sovereignty as 
one of the cardinal points of modern Democracy. 
The candidate, however, has raeroed himself iu 
the plartbrm, or the principles of it, which, to 
my mind, are not in harmony with Jackson De¬ 
mocracy, and I accordingly repudiate them. I 
cannot separate the candidate and platform in this 
instance, as they are identical, inasmuch as the 
nominee has said that he could no longer speak 
for himself, as James Buchanan, but as the expo¬ 
nent of the principles set forth in the platform. 
I am constrained, according to my notions of De¬ 
mocracy, to utterly reject the platform, and can¬ 
not give ray support to the nominee of the present 
Democratic party. 

Of the Republicans, I can only say that their 
t »tform and principles are sectional, and I cannot 
I conceive how any man loving this Union, devoted 
1 to its principles, can support a ticket fraught with 
I such disastrous consequences to the whole country 
j as its success would be. It has been my habit in 
! life to deprecate and oppose everything of a sec- 
i tional character, and therefore I cannot view with 
; complacency anything which is calculated to mili- 
; tate against the Union, or any section of the whole 
j country. You, my dear sir, know as well as I do, 

I that w'hen Texas was annexed to the United States 
she did not consider herself as identified with any 
particular section, but viewed herself as merged 
in the Union. She had received the sympathy of 
the citizens-of every section of the Union. Her 







13 


feeling, her interest, and her existence in becom¬ 
ing a member of the Union, she considered as in¬ 
separable from its preservation and prosperity. 

A sense of duty, under these circumstances, 
leads me to the conclusion to support the American 
' nominees, Fillmore and Donelson. They are good 
men, and I think the only men now in nomination 
for the Presidency and Vice Presidency before the 
American people who do most assuredly claim the 


I the sentiment of General Jackson, and show their 
• reverence for his memory and great services to the 
i nation, expressed in his letter to Dr. Coleman, 
“that it is time we should become a little more 
Americiinized.” Since the day on which the warn¬ 
ing was given, our country has been progressing; 
and from developments which have taken place, 
it seems to me that the exigencies of the country 
impress upon us the necessity of feeling fully alive 


cordial support of men who are true-hearted Ainer-' to our nationality, by evincing respect for his wise 
icans—Democrats and Whigs. All faithful uatu | counsel. I will not assume to offer to the people 
ralized citixens, though of foreign birth, who can- j of Texas the words of warning and admonition, 
not be controlled by any foreign allegiance, can} In the words of Jackson they have higher counsel, 
come forward fo their support, as rational men,; The days once were vvhen my admonitions and advice 
capable and willing to suj)port the Constitution I were offered to tliem. They will remember v/hat 


and the Union. 

Major Donelscr 
the same school with ourselves, which was tbo old 
Jefferson and Jackson Democracy; and he has 
ever proved true to his Democratic education—the 
love of the Union being the polar star. Mr. Fill¬ 
more was a ^yhig, and served the people of his 
district while he was a Kopresentative in Congress. 
His servicewas satisfiictory, an i he secured their 


j my course among them has ever been—they know 
you know, was brought up in | with what intense interest I have sought to secure 

their peace and advance their prosperity. My de¬ 
votion to them is not lessened at this moment—it 
can never abate so long as all 1 treasure upon earth 
remains in the bosom of that conmmnity. What¬ 
ever estimate they may think proper to place upon 
ray opinions is with them. To the aged and the 
' middle aged 1 would speak as to brethren—to th.-’ 


confidence. When his oflicial duties took a broader. younger men and the youth I would spealc as a 
range, and new and responsible duties devolved i father—and beseech tliem to take the course best 
upon him as the head of the nation, he cast aside j calculated to restore iiarmony to our distracted 
every sectional and local bias; his views on all ira- ■ country, and promote the general good. 


Thine, truly, SAM HOUSTON. 

To Hon. John Hancock, Austin, Texas. 


portant questions were limited only by the extent; 
of his duty to the whole country. Ills services i 
met the acceptance of the nation, and he retired, 
from office with the approving voice of thousande! 
who had been his former opponents. In my opin -1 
ion, he administered the government wisely and! 
well. He found the country in great excitement, j” 
as well as dissatisfaction, and even in peril; ami j 
vet he left it in repose, tranquillity, and safety ; i 
and it is a pleasure for me to look back and re-1 tlie 9th day of August, 185<j: 

member that, without any deviation from my linei William Graydon, Esq., was called to the chair, 
of duty as a Jackson Democrat, I was enabled to j and John B. Lewis and S. J. Bolling were appoinL 
austain and aid him in most of his leading meas¬ 
ures ; and so, too, were nearly all the true-hearted 


son 


American Meeting. 

At a large and cntluisiastic I'Tllraore and Donel- 
atification meeting, held in Greenville on 


ed secretaries. Upon motion of W. If. Crenshaf' 
the following resolutions were unanimously adopt- 


Jncksou Democrats of that time. Were tli# Dein-: ed, to wit: 
ocrats of the present day even as sound as theyj Whereas^ Millard Fillmore and Andrew J. Don- 
were then, though heresies bad then been intro-' cison have been selected by the American party 
duced into the party, I would cheerfully co-operate j as candidates for President and Vice President of 
and act with them on many important subjects ; j the United States. 

but since they have recognised squatter sovereign- i And whereas^ vre, a portion of the citizens of 
ty and their “ great principle” (which I have been j Butler county, fully impressed with the importance 


unable to discover) of the Kansas-Nebraslra bill, as 
tests of true Democracy—making them the front 
flanks of their party platform—I will not stand 
upon it, nor can I recognise such principles as 
truly Democratic. It was the attempt to carry out 
such measures v/hich lias involved us in our pres¬ 
ent calamitous and perilous situation. Ilencc th-; 
effort has been made to incorporate them with, 
and render them parts of, the ancient platform of 
the time-honored Democracy, supposing, as no 
doubt they did, that the taiismanic name of De¬ 
mocracy would unite the American people in sup¬ 
port of heresies as absurd as they are dangerous to 
the well-being of the country. 

But, my dear sir, I wall not attempt to go into 
detail further. I hope that Texas, when slie comes 
to the polls in November next, v/ill make a united 
rally for the American ticket, and tliat its triumph 
will be complete. I hope the friends of our Union 
and true Democratic principles will rally around 


of this election deem it proper to give expression 
to our sentiments relative tlioreto. 

Therefore^ resolved^ That we cordially approve 
the nomination of Messrs, Fillmore and Donelson, 
and will use all honorable means to promote their 
election. 

llfHolved, That in Millard Fillmore we have a 
candidate Avho once stood at the helm wlien the 
dark cloud of Free-soil fanaticism lowered over the 
political horizon, threatening the very existence of 
the Republic ; then it was that the conservative, 
the national, and the patriotic of all parties quailed 
with fear, and dreaded the result; but the occasion 
proved Fillmore to be a statesman fitted for the 
emergency. Rising above all sectional prejudice, 
and with the Constitution as his guide, he steered 
the ship of State through the angry billows of sec 
tional strife to the haven of safety and quiet; fa¬ 
naticism was hushed into silence ; a. calm ensued; 
the Compromise measures were generally acqui- 






14 


€goed 111; and, at the expiration of his tenu, Mr. 
I’illmorc retired from the Presidency leaving the 


country happy, contented and propperous, and 


carrying with him the esteem and respect of the 
patriotic of all parties. Demagogues have again 
excited a sectional storm, until danger is as immi¬ 
nent as before. Who so suitable to lead us through 
the present crisis as the man who, when tried, 
proved himself so well qualified to fill the.station, 
and was so acceptable to the people ? 

Jicfiolved, '’ hat the rights of the South are plain, 
palpable, well defined and well understood, and we 
believe they should no longer be treated as open 
questions: we therefore deprecate the continued 
agitation of the slavery question as injurious to 
the South and dangerous to the Union. 

Resolved^ That the Territories of the United 
States are the comfiion property of' all the States 


8;like and as such each State has the right to settle 


the same, and neither Congress, the Territorial 
Legislatures nor tVe people of the Territories, 
during their Territorial existence, have the right to 
exclude slaves or any other property from the 
same. Tlierefore we oppose the restoration of tiie 


Resolvody That we have tiie utmost oonindence 
in the integrity and ability of A. J. Donelson as & 
statesman. 

Rcsolvedy That the proceedings of this meeting 
bo published in the* Montgomery Hail, Washington 
Organ and other papers friendly to the election of 
Fillmore and Doneleon. 

The following named gentlemen were appoinbjri 
sub-electors for Butler County, to wit : Col. W’. 
ri. Crenshaw, I. J. McLemore, Esq., A. B. Scar¬ 
borough, Hon. R. R. Wright, Dr. J. L. Nixon, 
William Graydon, Esq., Dr. V/m. A. Beasly and A. 
M. Read. 

WM. GRAYDON, Chidnaaa. 

John B. Lawis, 


S. J. Bollino, f 


Secretaries. 


American Kesolotionssr 
We publish to-day the resolutions of a large 
find enthusiastic meeting of “Americans,’^ 
composed of original old-line Whigs and old- 


Missoun Compiomise aud we equally oppose tne '^ ^ 

, d . ^ ,hoe Oemocrats, and lie u at (.Treenvxiio, Ala 

nmro rt’nnnvimii? noctune of “Squatter SOVC!-- i ’ ' 1 


more oonoxious 
eignty.” 

Resolved, That the insidious doctrine now eu- 


jbama, onthe 9th instant. The spirit mani- 


tertained by many distinguished politicians, both 
North and South, tiiat the people of a Territory 
have the unrestrained right of .self government to 
the extent cf ri'gulating their ciomcBtic relations 
nnd declaring what shall and what shall not be 
held as propeidy, is alike dangerous to the rights 
of the South, incoropatiblo with the equal rights of I 


fested in these resolutions prevails generally 


tliroughout Alabama, and furnishes proof that 
! “ Old 8([uatt6r Sovereitjii’'’ will be abandoned 
j by tho Democracy of Alabama, who ai e Dem- 
ocraLs from principle, and not from party cis- 
cipiine, and who, when the parly to which 


the States in tlie Territories, and, in the language ! have aiways heretofore attached them- 
ot Mr, Calhoun, 


ri, “the most monstrous doctrine I selves, .abandons principle for the saAe of the 
I by an American statesman, worse! ^poilg abandon them. 
ot rroviso, therefore we can never j .iv .• v \ i i 


evei' advocated 
than ihe Wihnot 
support Mr. Buchanan, or any other man who con- 


The lime has been, when the rank and file of 


tendi? that “tho people of a Territory, like j fh® Democratic party simply inquired, “Wioaro 



peopl 

sidency and Vice Presidency exclusive-)’upon .sec¬ 
tional grouuds, is proof conclusive that ianaticism 
is t»ent upon subverting tho government. We 
therefore since-ely thank Mr. Fillmore for the 
manly efforts lie has recently made at Albany, 
Rochester, and elseivliere, to stein the tide of sec- 
tioual agitation 'iu disregard of the rights of the 


nominee of the Democratic party? ” Tliero i.s 
a wide diirereiice in the meaning of theso in¬ 
quiries. If tho queslioii now were ^^loh-o ia 
the nominee of the Democratic party for tlio 
Presideticy ?” the answer vrould be an easy 


South, for held patriotism iu btardiiig the i of Wlicatland, it. 

iien in liis den, and iivwikening in the Northern, btatc of Pennsylvania —alias “Ten 


cem 


mind a scn.se <■;' brotherly love, and tliat he alias “Old Squatter .SoTcrei^m,'’ and 


.servos the gratitude of the South, and should re¬ 
ceive tlieir suppo; t. ' 

Resolved, That as inc-nibers of the American 


Uiis an.STver would sutfice. 

Rut (he question is now, “IFAa-f i.s the Detn- 


party, wo support Mr, Fillmore upon the (Jeciar.a- !f>cratic candidate fof the Ib’esidcncy That, 
tion in bi.s letter of aceoptaneig that he “ .approves ■ in rather .a diflicult que.slion to unswer in any 

/TT'^ ‘if : 1 Ti Ji* I'M » fi /i? - ca 11 r-t /»ii »i r*/7i H tt <-I. n 1 • • a —^ 


its great h'aduig prineipies as annouucecl bv the ■ civ.rta r- lUr, n 

Katfoiul t'ouoril M l-liiifodpl.ia;” as oM Iioe i, color o! U.o c.n.tmo- 

■ Icon I We look ujion him, and he is iiot whai 

ho ?j)as : nor vail Inx be long what he rtow wi, to 


Y-^idgs .an-d conservative Demoer.aUs we support 
liiui upon his a8.surance, Iu the same letter ol ac¬ 
ceptance, (n'ui in nu-dry speeches iu IS-:?/ Yoik,) 
that, ii’tkctcd, hi.s p.a;(t. ad-nkd'itrai.ion shill be au 
exponent cf his tuoure; and ui national men we 
support Id.'o bee i-i?e he has been tried and found 
!TOrt ly to bo toe ruler of .a great .-And free pcnr.]..u 


our VI non. A Ji^ed.Fvalisi of tho days cf that 
pure Democ'/atic kador, J^une ^5 Madison, j'd a 
Democrat of the days of Jackson—a tariffman 
in PennsylvanD, who conlu ewear that “ Folk 


i 










was a better tarilf man than Clay,” lut a free- 
trade man in the Senate—a TV^ilmot-Proviso 
man, who claimed “ sovereign and exclusive 
power in Congress over slavery in the Territo¬ 
ries,” in 1848, yet an advocate of “squatter 
sovereignty ” in 1856—a thoroughgoing Mis¬ 
souri restrictionist only a few years since, and 
now a Kansas-Nebraskaite, up to the hub—an 
“ old fogy ” in all time past, hut a filibuster-: 
ing, world-defying, war-threatening, Ostend- 


sale ” for twenty years past~the highest lad¬ 
der always commanding this merchandise^.— 
Hence, no politician, either Whig or Democrat, 
who looked to political advancement da^ed to 
oppose foreignum. Such politicians frowned 
upon the effort to create an American party— 
but the people themselves, nevertheless, nised 
up this pai-ty in defiance of the politicians. 

This party has now become “ a power in the 
State”—it lias increased beyond all former ex¬ 


manifesto “ Young American ” now—an advo- j amples in the history of parties—and it is defe¬ 
cate of low wages in 1840, by reducing the j fiiied to absorb the entire eon.servative elements 
standard of prices to that of continental Eu-1 which all other pai-ties have contained. No¬ 
rope, (or about ten cents a day,) in order to! tld.ng can prevent its final triumph. The old 
coder the country with heneftsf but wuw; VVhig leaders stand aghast! They cry out 
foi-sooth, the poor man’s friend, because in the bitterness of anguish, “ where shall we 
imnts his vote / ! go ?” They have been made powerless bv the 

Such has been, and such is, Jame.s Buchan- j success of the American party ; and what se 


an:—what he will he no man can pi edict, from natural—wha*’ so consistent with the .^nirit of 


•his antecedents, but, if the people iirc them-i as to join the standard of the antago- 

selves, wise, prudent and conservative, we can nwi of this part)’^ ? 


fairly predict what he will not ho- —to-wit, the 
President of the United States! The same 
determination to know what a candidate is, 
instead of being content to ask who he is, 
which is Tuaiiifested in the resolutions to which 
we refer, prevails in the minds of the thinking 
people of the whole country. A change has 
1)ecn wrought in the people—they do not now 
fjHoio leaders —but they lead the politiciar.s 
and make them submit to tlieir will. 

Our government rapidly b.,coming in 
practice, what it is in theorv'—the people are 
the »i>vereign.'i, and the representelives are their 
servants. To tins change in tjie actual rela¬ 
tions between the people and the politicians, 
therefore, inu.st be attributed' the conduct of 
.sucii men as Pratt, Pearce, Johnson, Benja¬ 
min, Choate, Evans, fJoues, Toombs, and a few 
other hitherto prominent AVhigs and ambitious 
politicians, who have gone ovei- “ bag and bag¬ 
gage” to the cliam Democracy, and now sup¬ 
port for tlie Presidency the representative of 
floctrmes and me/fiures against which they 
h. 9 ;Vc made war ail their lives ! The idea that 
“ Fillmore has no chance” is a mere pretext to 
conceal their attiinpled revenge upon the 
American party. 

Wo desire, by the repetition of this truth, 
to impress it deeply iqioii Iho minds of the 
people, that tin's Ami-vican movement came 
fn>m the people, .and has, from iirst to last, 
been opposed by the trading politicians. The 


fweign element has been one “ baiter and 


llie American party has prostrated iiU their 
hopes of political advancement, unlcs.s indeed, 
the sham Democrac}?- will reward tliem 
recruits to it.s ranks! They look around them 
and behold amongst the present chieftains oy 
modern Democracy, hundred.s of men like 
themselves, who have been rewarded wtith 
pov.’er, place and preferment, for nirriilar acts 
of transfer ,—a wink is given—a 7iod re¬ 
turned—“all's right”—away these politicians 
go—and though, at first, they swear to adhere 
to their “old Whigs principles,” as long a« 
they live, and a little longer, a lew years wili 
find th.cm “ dyed in the wool Democrats” ready 
to make oath, and to furnish certificates, tbar 
they never supported a single Whig measure! 

All these men wili promptly become 'nat¬ 
uralized Democrats,^' like those on that long 
list of names presented at the 28th and 29th 
pages of the “ Madison” letters, who now (x>n- 
trol the politics of Virginia, and upon the very 
principles laid down and followed by the pres-^ 
ent administration, to givcofieeto naiuralized 
foreigners in preference to natives, these gen¬ 
tlemen will have a right to demand the higliest 
posts of honor and iTus.t, -provided the s?iam 
Democi-acy shall defeat the con.servalive Amer¬ 
ican party. 

These are our views of the true causa vrhjr 
such prominent leading Whigs ixTuso to sup ¬ 
port Millar<l h illmoi’e, and we add, in conclu¬ 
sion, that in vie w of the circurn dances in which 
they find thcrascives, it is not in cur bejvrt to 
speak harshly of them, hut rather to comnus- 
serato them that their case is so desperate they 


are com.pGl!ed to resort, to so desperate a 


reinceljh 











CfllC 

The uni3ersi"!ied, members of the National 
Krecutive Co^mnUtec of the American Party^ 
hare pleasure in announcing to the people, that 
•'atisfactory arrangements for the future mainte¬ 
nance of the American Organ, as an .author- 
itatire exponent and advocate of the principles 
of the American Party^ have been compiet(‘d. 

Recommencing its labors, under these new aus- 
niees, the undersigned cheerfully commend tlio 


LAK. 

AmjvRican Organ to the generous confidence of 
the American Party, in every section of the 
Confederacy, and they hope its columns may 
command the widest circulation. 

HUMPHREY MARSHALL, of Kv. ’ 
SOLOMON G. 114YEN, of N. Y. * 

J. MORRISON HARRIS, of Md. 
JACOB BROOM, Penn. 

Washington City, J ). C., May l?ith, IBSf-. 


PJ?*OSFE€TUS OF TffE AMEHiCAK ORGAN, 


The American Oryaji having been adopted, by the Nxecutivs Committee of the American. mrrn~ 
of Congress, as the central organ of the American party, the proprietor, with a view to its gen¬ 
eral and extensive circulation throughout the country, has determined, on consultation with his polit¬ 
ical friends, to furnish the same to subscribers, whose subscriptions are remitted after May !«/!, and 
-'vring the 7nonlIis of May, June, and July, on the following reduced terms, to wit : 


T.rms of the Daily American Organ. 

Oaily Orga'ii, for one year ~ - $3 00 j Itaily Organ, for six months - - $'2 Oi) 

Icrms of the Wceldy A-merican Organ, 


Weekly Or gam, for one year, to nngle sub¬ 
scribers .■ SI 50 , 

Weekly Organ, for six months, to single ■ 

subscribers.. $1 00 

Weekly Organ, for pne year, to clubs of ' 


eight or more subscribers, each - 25 

Weekly Organ, for six months, to clubs 
of eight or more subscribers, each - 75 

Weekly Orgem, for ike campaign, to wit: 
from Jidy l.si to \oth November, each 50 


Ail subscribers whose subscriptions have been remitted during the month of May, have been 
charged only at above rates. 



\ 


\ 













<0^ 

'^Mh\ • 



vP V • 


^ ^ o'^v * /}^ ^ 

cr ^ .0^ 

«'■*•'» c ® ** ® ♦ 0^ ♦*■'*♦ ^o *^^'' c ® ** ® ♦ 






0.0 ,0 , , 1 '?^. ^ » “ A° 

V,/ -Mm. %,<•» .-ate'-, ^-^i-.,/ :'M:. 


_ /% '••W?-' /% 

-. A <v G^ ^ -o.*- A "''..si 

• '■ * * » X*^ G ® ” ® -> fV •*'**-» "^O G ° ** ® ♦ ' i 

•* x^ ' Tx .. ^ ^ jS^nf/Z^ ■» x^ «> .- f 



o y 




< O. ! 

i> 


o jP <i5 ?P 

® ° .0 e,^ %. *'o hO . 0 ^ "V ’ A>^ 

^ aO ^1“®' v" xP^ ^ v^ 

^ ^(C*\sO>7 o ^ ^ SlIS^ * "‘rCORA'’o ^ * 

^ <L^ ci*" ♦ -* ^ -<1?^ cf^ 

.» ^ A - S /•. V 


A 





<• 0 N o ^ 


.4^ 


o » i 



0^ t*-^'*-* *^-> <-o^' t*"'*-* 


4 0 . • 

yP •« 

,* <,K o'. ,- 

y %. •'o-”^ ,-o 

> v^ .^\:a^'^ cv a 





<y 


^9^ 


■‘ ^ ^ *.4^ 

, .<y i''-^, ,y 

KV -..mvxx'.i. > J-®"^*#* . 

0.0- ^4, ‘o,,- <;,<• o .0.0’ .o’ V 

^ xO ^ V aP x> O’ s*V' 

/%. /% “ 

, 4::^^. (,■»• o .o..* A ^ 0^ -o..- 

♦ ^ fvV . t f » - ,A^ oWo^'^ t/ff 

o* fc” -^X •Six i:^ "^X '.'-.-v 





o V 

* ^ *■ A Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide f 

Ay *'• *o* VT ^ 


I 

Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. ^ 




4,'^'Pp 


* PreservationTechnologies 

^ *^ > A WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION j/ 

* Vy>> 6, vP * t 111 Thomson Park Drive 

^ "• Cranberry Township, PA 16066 


fyOA \ 7TQ_0<<<H 








:'MR: :«^°. 

O** ® iL^ ^r\ O Hy 

' ‘ ‘ <* *^5!^ &*• *. 

'■ * “ *0. 6°"®+^ «■'• 

1*^ 1*0 e* nn>^ -9 .-i 

I t <;sSoOvm'^«* ^ ^ ♦ ae'/fyT^^ ^ 

° ^vvxx^v 

aO ^ 9,-y* ^ ^ *®n0® ,0*’ 

<0^ - » • o^ ^ V c S • • ^ v% <^^ « * « 

^ ^4^ »j(Og A”. vC^ * sife • ^r. 1^ •' 

'^‘4^ . '’^5^: 'I'V %^<& », 

«G^ ^ •"o**'* .A .A 

6 ® " ® -» ** fO^ •‘■'•^ ^Q 

"■ ■^■^0^ '^o4' -*0^ 


o H 


• I 1 


'' »5 




.•1<^ 


> »’,0^ ,«•», ^> . \> .»'•» "^ n’^ 





rxV 





, -» ^L'" ■ * (^ 'y ’ <* 

y ^ '^•*‘‘ V^ 

0^ « • '■' ® ♦ 0 ® “ ® -* 

„ ^ “* ^ <3*^ • ^cs55vK 

^ «. ^^//jus^ ^ k> •** ^wsVlWV''^^^ ^ 

*’OnO® ^0-' O N O <0^^ 

^ *‘^fe'' \- y ♦^vVA- %. A^” »' 

■*' * "Cp o 

^ ^A. * 







N o 


•'-r-** ,0^ ^ 'oo. 

.0^ .•>'--» 9-, a"^ o®®®-» 





4 O. 

— <L^ O 

"®-®" <0' 

V^ ^ 4? ® 

r?* « fiii® * "^ c,^ ♦ 

- S'^rv • A^*^' -* '^^^^IIMI10^5^ ® r'? "' n. 

A'' •-»- 

^ 'o, * - A <v 0^ -o, . >» A <. 

A 0 ® ** ® -» Or • *■ ^ * ♦ "*^0 A*^ c ® ** ® >» 

o' ‘ “ 




A 

aP ^ 



'^O'? 

‘•-- V 'V'*^*/ * 

• - * ’ * '‘^ aP^ I. 

‘ 4?’ ’“-v'?-^-** .-c 

*■ AP V • 

Vx>* 






• / 


* <^v • 

-V'..' .6^ '.'.7* A <. '‘'TTT*’ 0^ ^c> 

D038Sfia0S. ^ r\ ^ r 

LIBRARY BINDING ^ ♦ ^^0 O *' * -^ * ' O * Cl' 

C^ ♦ D N 0 ,0 ^ . / 1 \P . ^ ® " ® ,'0 

JUL 70 ^-.% % •^'‘' 

ST.^GUSTINE ^ , '^^ey C^^MM}° '^•<y •^P"^'' 



-AO 






^ - >-c-’" ’vP <D' '• 

’ W* .ty ■ 




♦ ‘ly ^ 









































